niryuu/sni-each-converted huggingface dataset:
CONTEXT: The annoying phone ring in the Once Upon a Time in America scene you quoted, is there not for the purpose of annoying the viewer (which I admit id does a bit), but is there to share with the viewer and impress in the audience the feeling experienced by Noodles (De Niro). In order to reach the desidered effect, it has to be long and certainly not pleasant. The phone ring is not real, it's just in Noodles head and expresses the metaphorical ring of his guilty conscience, which is stirred in the opium den by the newspaper's headlines hovering over the photos of Max, Patsy and Cockeye that read "Bootleggers trapped by Feds; Three Slain". Noodles tries once again to obliterate the painful memory of his betrayal triggered by the newspaper by sucking greedily on the opium pipe, bu to no avail. The scene is also beautifully edited in reverse, thus the audience does really understand the meaning of the ringing phone only at the end of the sequence, when we see Noodles picking up the phone and calling the desk of Sergeant Halloran (we are only shown the nametag on his desk). When Halloran (or one of his agents) picks up, the ringing stops and is replaced by a deafening, high-pitched noise that forces Noodles to stand up, no matter the amount of opium smoked. Here's the phone ring scene from Youtube:  <sep>  Q: What is the significance of annoying phone ring? A: The annoying phone ring in the Once Upon a Time in America scene you quoted, is there not for the purpose of annoying the viewer (which I admit id does a bit  Q: What is the purpose for it if not for annoying the viewer? A: is there to share with the viewer and impress in the audience the feeling experienced by Noodles (De Niro  Q: What feeling is Noodles experiencing? A: The phone ring is not real, it's just in Noodles head and expresses the metaphorical ring of his guilty conscience  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What was Noodles feeling guilty about?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: The annoying phone ring in the Once Upon a Time in America scene you quoted, is there not for the purpose of annoying the viewer (which I admit id does a bit), but is there to share with the viewer and impress in the audience the feeling experienced by Noodles (De Niro). In order to reach the desidered effect, it has to be long and certainly not pleasant. The phone ring is not real, it's just in Noodles head and expresses the metaphorical ring of his guilty conscience, which is stirred in the opium den by the newspaper's headlines hovering over the photos of Max, Patsy and Cockeye that read "Bootleggers trapped by Feds; Three Slain". Noodles tries once again to obliterate the painful memory of his betrayal triggered by the newspaper by sucking greedily on the opium pipe, bu to no avail. The scene is also beautifully edited in reverse, thus the audience does really understand the meaning of the ringing phone only at the end of the sequence, when we see Noodles picking up the phone and calling the desk of Sergeant Halloran (we are only shown the nametag on his desk). When Halloran (or one of his agents) picks up, the ringing stops and is replaced by a deafening, high-pitched noise that forces Noodles to stand up, no matter the amount of opium smoked. Here's the phone ring scene from Youtube:  <sep>  Q: What is the significance of annoying phone ring? A: The annoying phone ring in the Once Upon a Time in America scene you quoted, is there not for the purpose of annoying the viewer (which I admit id does a bit  Q: What is the purpose for it if not for annoying the viewer? A: is there to share with the viewer and impress in the audience the feeling experienced by Noodles (De Niro  Q: What feeling is Noodles experiencing? A: The phone ring is not real, it's just in Noodles head and expresses the metaphorical ring of his guilty conscience  Q: What was Noodles feeling guilty about? A: is stirred in the opium den by the newspaper's headlines hovering over the photos of Max, Patsy and Cockeye that read "Bootleggers trapped by Feds; Three Slain  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: When does the ringing of the phone stop?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: The annoying phone ring in the Once Upon a Time in America scene you quoted, is there not for the purpose of annoying the viewer (which I admit id does a bit), but is there to share with the viewer and impress in the audience the feeling experienced by Noodles (De Niro). In order to reach the desidered effect, it has to be long and certainly not pleasant. The phone ring is not real, it's just in Noodles head and expresses the metaphorical ring of his guilty conscience, which is stirred in the opium den by the newspaper's headlines hovering over the photos of Max, Patsy and Cockeye that read "Bootleggers trapped by Feds; Three Slain". Noodles tries once again to obliterate the painful memory of his betrayal triggered by the newspaper by sucking greedily on the opium pipe, bu to no avail. The scene is also beautifully edited in reverse, thus the audience does really understand the meaning of the ringing phone only at the end of the sequence, when we see Noodles picking up the phone and calling the desk of Sergeant Halloran (we are only shown the nametag on his desk). When Halloran (or one of his agents) picks up, the ringing stops and is replaced by a deafening, high-pitched noise that forces Noodles to stand up, no matter the amount of opium smoked. Here's the phone ring scene from Youtube:  <sep>  Q: What is the significance of annoying phone ring? A: The annoying phone ring in the Once Upon a Time in America scene you quoted, is there not for the purpose of annoying the viewer (which I admit id does a bit  Q: What is the purpose for it if not for annoying the viewer? A: is there to share with the viewer and impress in the audience the feeling experienced by Noodles (De Niro  Q: What feeling is Noodles experiencing? A: The phone ring is not real, it's just in Noodles head and expresses the metaphorical ring of his guilty conscience  Q: What was Noodles feeling guilty about? A: is stirred in the opium den by the newspaper's headlines hovering over the photos of Max, Patsy and Cockeye that read "Bootleggers trapped by Feds; Three Slain  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Was Noodles involved in the bootlegging or just people he knows?
Output: No
CONTEXT: The annoying phone ring in the Once Upon a Time in America scene you quoted, is there not for the purpose of annoying the viewer (which I admit id does a bit), but is there to share with the viewer and impress in the audience the feeling experienced by Noodles (De Niro). In order to reach the desidered effect, it has to be long and certainly not pleasant. The phone ring is not real, it's just in Noodles head and expresses the metaphorical ring of his guilty conscience, which is stirred in the opium den by the newspaper's headlines hovering over the photos of Max, Patsy and Cockeye that read "Bootleggers trapped by Feds; Three Slain". Noodles tries once again to obliterate the painful memory of his betrayal triggered by the newspaper by sucking greedily on the opium pipe, bu to no avail. The scene is also beautifully edited in reverse, thus the audience does really understand the meaning of the ringing phone only at the end of the sequence, when we see Noodles picking up the phone and calling the desk of Sergeant Halloran (we are only shown the nametag on his desk). When Halloran (or one of his agents) picks up, the ringing stops and is replaced by a deafening, high-pitched noise that forces Noodles to stand up, no matter the amount of opium smoked. Here's the phone ring scene from Youtube:  <sep>  Q: What is the significance of annoying phone ring? A: The annoying phone ring in the Once Upon a Time in America scene you quoted, is there not for the purpose of annoying the viewer (which I admit id does a bit  Q: What is the purpose for it if not for annoying the viewer? A: is there to share with the viewer and impress in the audience the feeling experienced by Noodles (De Niro  Q: What feeling is Noodles experiencing? A: The phone ring is not real, it's just in Noodles head and expresses the metaphorical ring of his guilty conscience  Q: What was Noodles feeling guilty about? A: is stirred in the opium den by the newspaper's headlines hovering over the photos of Max, Patsy and Cockeye that read "Bootleggers trapped by Feds; Three Slain  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: That's okay. Do you know who this people are in relation to Noodles?
Output: No
CONTEXT: Stupid? Not at all. The FBI tells Sonny Black that Donnie was an agent, to let them know that the FBI can infiltrate them at will. This will create suspicion for every new member going forward, and the whole idea is to break down the walls of trust so they'll rat on each other. It's actually a quite brilliant move on the FBI's part.  <sep>  Q: In the film Donnie Brasco, why did the FBI tell the mafia that Donnie was an undercover agent?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Stupid? Not at all. The FBI tells Sonny Black that Donnie was an agent, to let them know that the FBI can infiltrate them at will. This will create suspicion for every new member going forward, and the whole idea is to break down the walls of trust so they'll rat on each other. It's actually a quite brilliant move on the FBI's part.  <sep>  Q: In the film Donnie Brasco, why did the FBI tell the mafia that Donnie was an undercover agent? A: to let them know that the FBI can infiltrate them at will  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Thanks. I also need to ask, why does the FBI seem stupid enough to do that? Actually it seems smart to me, but do you have an answer to that question?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: The biggest reason is that they weren't prepared for an attack. The Lannister army wasn't supposed to be there, but rather defending King's Landing and Casterly Rock. Lady Tyrell even goes on to say that fighting was never really the Tyrell's strong suit, so in-universe it wasn't a surprise that they fell so quickly. Also, wealth doesn't equate to army size. Just because the Tyrell's have a lot of money doesn't mean that they have a huge army. In fact, house Lannister is in significant debt because of it's huge army and all of the fighting they've had to do over the last few years.  <sep>  Q: How was a powerful house so easily defeated?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: The biggest reason is that they weren't prepared for an attack. The Lannister army wasn't supposed to be there, but rather defending King's Landing and Casterly Rock. Lady Tyrell even goes on to say that fighting was never really the Tyrell's strong suit, so in-universe it wasn't a surprise that they fell so quickly. Also, wealth doesn't equate to army size. Just because the Tyrell's have a lot of money doesn't mean that they have a huge army. In fact, house Lannister is in significant debt because of it's huge army and all of the fighting they've had to do over the last few years.  <sep>  Q: How was a powerful house so easily defeated? A: The biggest reason is that they weren't prepared for an attack  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: In GOT season 7 episode 3, we see the Lannister army invade and defeat house Tyrell in Highgarden. The fight was so one-sided
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: The biggest reason is that they weren't prepared for an attack. The Lannister army wasn't supposed to be there, but rather defending King's Landing and Casterly Rock. Lady Tyrell even goes on to say that fighting was never really the Tyrell's strong suit, so in-universe it wasn't a surprise that they fell so quickly. Also, wealth doesn't equate to army size. Just because the Tyrell's have a lot of money doesn't mean that they have a huge army. In fact, house Lannister is in significant debt because of it's huge army and all of the fighting they've had to do over the last few years.  <sep>  Q: How was a powerful house so easily defeated? A: The biggest reason is that they weren't prepared for an attack  Q: In GOT season 7 episode 3, we see the Lannister army invade and defeat house Tyrell in Highgarden. The fight was so one-sided A: The Lannister army wasn't supposed to be there, but rather defending King's Landing and Casterly Rock  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Its established in season 7 episode 1 that the Lannister army is running short of supplies and money and house Tyrell richest house in Westeros.
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: The biggest reason is that they weren't prepared for an attack. The Lannister army wasn't supposed to be there, but rather defending King's Landing and Casterly Rock. Lady Tyrell even goes on to say that fighting was never really the Tyrell's strong suit, so in-universe it wasn't a surprise that they fell so quickly. Also, wealth doesn't equate to army size. Just because the Tyrell's have a lot of money doesn't mean that they have a huge army. In fact, house Lannister is in significant debt because of it's huge army and all of the fighting they've had to do over the last few years.  <sep>  Q: How was a powerful house so easily defeated? A: The biggest reason is that they weren't prepared for an attack  Q: In GOT season 7 episode 3, we see the Lannister army invade and defeat house Tyrell in Highgarden. The fight was so one-sided A: The Lannister army wasn't supposed to be there, but rather defending King's Landing and Casterly Rock  Q: Its established in season 7 episode 1 that the Lannister army is running short of supplies and money and house Tyrell richest house in Westeros. A: Also, wealth doesn't equate to army size. Just because the Tyrell's have a lot of money doesn't mean that they have a huge army  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: The writers of the show intentionally decided not to show the actual battle
Output: No
CONTEXT: Many reviews are calling this a black comedy or dark comedy, which is comedy that makes light of a serious subject or a comedy with gloomy or disturbing elements. If this film was just a drama, it would be a serious depiction of four girls going on spring break and the tragedy that unfolded when they got mixed up with a gangster. Instead, there are pink ski masks, bikinis in court, lots of sex, references to Britney Spears, the mere existence of a drug dealer named Alien who shows up to bail the girls out of jail... The basic premise is ridiculous, and the way that violence is interspersed with this ridiculousness sets up an uncomfortable edge that seems to keep audiences talking about this movie. Mostly the characters are flat and the story is not that gripping, but the edge that Harmony Korinne keeps the audience on - never knowing which direction it would go - seems to keep viewers engaged, whether they are engrossed or repelled.  <sep>  Q: How exactly is the movie a comedy?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Many reviews are calling this a black comedy or dark comedy, which is comedy that makes light of a serious subject or a comedy with gloomy or disturbing elements. If this film was just a drama, it would be a serious depiction of four girls going on spring break and the tragedy that unfolded when they got mixed up with a gangster. Instead, there are pink ski masks, bikinis in court, lots of sex, references to Britney Spears, the mere existence of a drug dealer named Alien who shows up to bail the girls out of jail... The basic premise is ridiculous, and the way that violence is interspersed with this ridiculousness sets up an uncomfortable edge that seems to keep audiences talking about this movie. Mostly the characters are flat and the story is not that gripping, but the edge that Harmony Korinne keeps the audience on - never knowing which direction it would go - seems to keep viewers engaged, whether they are engrossed or repelled.  <sep>  Q: How exactly is the movie a comedy? A: reviews are calling this a black comedy or dark comedy  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What is a dark comedy?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Many reviews are calling this a black comedy or dark comedy, which is comedy that makes light of a serious subject or a comedy with gloomy or disturbing elements. If this film was just a drama, it would be a serious depiction of four girls going on spring break and the tragedy that unfolded when they got mixed up with a gangster. Instead, there are pink ski masks, bikinis in court, lots of sex, references to Britney Spears, the mere existence of a drug dealer named Alien who shows up to bail the girls out of jail... The basic premise is ridiculous, and the way that violence is interspersed with this ridiculousness sets up an uncomfortable edge that seems to keep audiences talking about this movie. Mostly the characters are flat and the story is not that gripping, but the edge that Harmony Korinne keeps the audience on - never knowing which direction it would go - seems to keep viewers engaged, whether they are engrossed or repelled.  <sep>  Q: How exactly is the movie a comedy? A: reviews are calling this a black comedy or dark comedy  Q: What is a dark comedy? A: comedy that makes light of a serious subject or a comedy with gloomy or disturbing elements  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Is the movie supposed to be funny?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Many reviews are calling this a black comedy or dark comedy, which is comedy that makes light of a serious subject or a comedy with gloomy or disturbing elements. If this film was just a drama, it would be a serious depiction of four girls going on spring break and the tragedy that unfolded when they got mixed up with a gangster. Instead, there are pink ski masks, bikinis in court, lots of sex, references to Britney Spears, the mere existence of a drug dealer named Alien who shows up to bail the girls out of jail... The basic premise is ridiculous, and the way that violence is interspersed with this ridiculousness sets up an uncomfortable edge that seems to keep audiences talking about this movie. Mostly the characters are flat and the story is not that gripping, but the edge that Harmony Korinne keeps the audience on - never knowing which direction it would go - seems to keep viewers engaged, whether they are engrossed or repelled.  <sep>  Q: How exactly is the movie a comedy? A: reviews are calling this a black comedy or dark comedy  Q: What is a dark comedy? A: comedy that makes light of a serious subject or a comedy with gloomy or disturbing elements  Q: Is the movie supposed to be funny? A: Many reviews are calling this a black comedy or dark comedy  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What is the movie classified as?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Many reviews are calling this a black comedy or dark comedy, which is comedy that makes light of a serious subject or a comedy with gloomy or disturbing elements. If this film was just a drama, it would be a serious depiction of four girls going on spring break and the tragedy that unfolded when they got mixed up with a gangster. Instead, there are pink ski masks, bikinis in court, lots of sex, references to Britney Spears, the mere existence of a drug dealer named Alien who shows up to bail the girls out of jail... The basic premise is ridiculous, and the way that violence is interspersed with this ridiculousness sets up an uncomfortable edge that seems to keep audiences talking about this movie. Mostly the characters are flat and the story is not that gripping, but the edge that Harmony Korinne keeps the audience on - never knowing which direction it would go - seems to keep viewers engaged, whether they are engrossed or repelled.  <sep>  Q: How exactly is the movie a comedy? A: reviews are calling this a black comedy or dark comedy  Q: What is a dark comedy? A: comedy that makes light of a serious subject or a comedy with gloomy or disturbing elements  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What are the Britney Spears references?
Output: No
CONTEXT: Many reviews are calling this a black comedy or dark comedy, which is comedy that makes light of a serious subject or a comedy with gloomy or disturbing elements. If this film was just a drama, it would be a serious depiction of four girls going on spring break and the tragedy that unfolded when they got mixed up with a gangster. Instead, there are pink ski masks, bikinis in court, lots of sex, references to Britney Spears, the mere existence of a drug dealer named Alien who shows up to bail the girls out of jail... The basic premise is ridiculous, and the way that violence is interspersed with this ridiculousness sets up an uncomfortable edge that seems to keep audiences talking about this movie. Mostly the characters are flat and the story is not that gripping, but the edge that Harmony Korinne keeps the audience on - never knowing which direction it would go - seems to keep viewers engaged, whether they are engrossed or repelled.  <sep>  Q: How exactly is the movie a comedy? A: reviews are calling this a black comedy or dark comedy  Q: What is a dark comedy? A: comedy that makes light of a serious subject or a comedy with gloomy or disturbing elements  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What does the James Franco character mean?
Output: No
CONTEXT: The message of American History X is quite simple: violence begets violence. The whole film is a series of escalations based on revenge; Derek and Danny lose their father and hate consumes them. They win a basketball game against the black gang (and their turf in the process) and the gang try and steal their fathers' truck as revenge, Derek kills them over it. But then Derek's arrest interrupts this pattern, he goes off to prison and with the help of Dr. Sweeney he realises the pattern of behaviour and does what he can to prevent it from going any further. Derek has his catharsis and becomes a different person, and tries to help Danny do the same. But the problem is the same hasn't happened to those that he's wronged; there are still people out there from the black gang who have lost friends and blame them both for it, and in the end Danny pays the price. It is much more poignant and reflective of real life in this way, after years of fighting it's not so simple to drop everything and get the happy ending Hollywood has taught us is waiting.  <sep>  Q: Why did American History X end so unexpectedly?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: The message of American History X is quite simple: violence begets violence. The whole film is a series of escalations based on revenge; Derek and Danny lose their father and hate consumes them. They win a basketball game against the black gang (and their turf in the process) and the gang try and steal their fathers' truck as revenge, Derek kills them over it. But then Derek's arrest interrupts this pattern, he goes off to prison and with the help of Dr. Sweeney he realises the pattern of behaviour and does what he can to prevent it from going any further. Derek has his catharsis and becomes a different person, and tries to help Danny do the same. But the problem is the same hasn't happened to those that he's wronged; there are still people out there from the black gang who have lost friends and blame them both for it, and in the end Danny pays the price. It is much more poignant and reflective of real life in this way, after years of fighting it's not so simple to drop everything and get the happy ending Hollywood has taught us is waiting.  <sep>  Q: Why did American History X end so unexpectedly? A: The message of American History X is quite simple: violence begets violence  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: But why did the movie end in such an unexpected way?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: The message of American History X is quite simple: violence begets violence. The whole film is a series of escalations based on revenge; Derek and Danny lose their father and hate consumes them. They win a basketball game against the black gang (and their turf in the process) and the gang try and steal their fathers' truck as revenge, Derek kills them over it. But then Derek's arrest interrupts this pattern, he goes off to prison and with the help of Dr. Sweeney he realises the pattern of behaviour and does what he can to prevent it from going any further. Derek has his catharsis and becomes a different person, and tries to help Danny do the same. But the problem is the same hasn't happened to those that he's wronged; there are still people out there from the black gang who have lost friends and blame them both for it, and in the end Danny pays the price. It is much more poignant and reflective of real life in this way, after years of fighting it's not so simple to drop everything and get the happy ending Hollywood has taught us is waiting.  <sep>  Q: Why did American History X end so unexpectedly? A: The message of American History X is quite simple: violence begets violence  Q: But why did the movie end in such an unexpected way? A: there are still people out there from the black gang who have lost friends and blame them both for it  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What was the central theme of the movie?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: The message of American History X is quite simple: violence begets violence. The whole film is a series of escalations based on revenge; Derek and Danny lose their father and hate consumes them. They win a basketball game against the black gang (and their turf in the process) and the gang try and steal their fathers' truck as revenge, Derek kills them over it. But then Derek's arrest interrupts this pattern, he goes off to prison and with the help of Dr. Sweeney he realises the pattern of behaviour and does what he can to prevent it from going any further. Derek has his catharsis and becomes a different person, and tries to help Danny do the same. But the problem is the same hasn't happened to those that he's wronged; there are still people out there from the black gang who have lost friends and blame them both for it, and in the end Danny pays the price. It is much more poignant and reflective of real life in this way, after years of fighting it's not so simple to drop everything and get the happy ending Hollywood has taught us is waiting.  <sep>  Q: Why did American History X end so unexpectedly? A: The message of American History X is quite simple: violence begets violence  Q: But why did the movie end in such an unexpected way? A: there are still people out there from the black gang who have lost friends and blame them both for it  Q: What was the central theme of the movie? A: The whole film is a series of escalations based on revenge  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Does the movie portray revenge as a justified action?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: The message of American History X is quite simple: violence begets violence. The whole film is a series of escalations based on revenge; Derek and Danny lose their father and hate consumes them. They win a basketball game against the black gang (and their turf in the process) and the gang try and steal their fathers' truck as revenge, Derek kills them over it. But then Derek's arrest interrupts this pattern, he goes off to prison and with the help of Dr. Sweeney he realises the pattern of behaviour and does what he can to prevent it from going any further. Derek has his catharsis and becomes a different person, and tries to help Danny do the same. But the problem is the same hasn't happened to those that he's wronged; there are still people out there from the black gang who have lost friends and blame them both for it, and in the end Danny pays the price. It is much more poignant and reflective of real life in this way, after years of fighting it's not so simple to drop everything and get the happy ending Hollywood has taught us is waiting.  <sep>  Q: Why did American History X end so unexpectedly? A: The message of American History X is quite simple: violence begets violence  Q: But why did the movie end in such an unexpected way? A: there are still people out there from the black gang who have lost friends and blame them both for it  Q: What was the central theme of the movie? A: The whole film is a series of escalations based on revenge  Q: Does the movie portray revenge as a justified action? A: Derek's arrest interrupts this pattern, he goes off to prison and with the help of Dr. Sweeney he realises  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What does he realize?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: The message of American History X is quite simple: violence begets violence. The whole film is a series of escalations based on revenge; Derek and Danny lose their father and hate consumes them. They win a basketball game against the black gang (and their turf in the process) and the gang try and steal their fathers' truck as revenge, Derek kills them over it. But then Derek's arrest interrupts this pattern, he goes off to prison and with the help of Dr. Sweeney he realises the pattern of behaviour and does what he can to prevent it from going any further. Derek has his catharsis and becomes a different person, and tries to help Danny do the same. But the problem is the same hasn't happened to those that he's wronged; there are still people out there from the black gang who have lost friends and blame them both for it, and in the end Danny pays the price. It is much more poignant and reflective of real life in this way, after years of fighting it's not so simple to drop everything and get the happy ending Hollywood has taught us is waiting.  <sep>  Q: Why did American History X end so unexpectedly? A: The message of American History X is quite simple: violence begets violence  Q: But why did the movie end in such an unexpected way? A: there are still people out there from the black gang who have lost friends and blame them both for it  Q: What was the central theme of the movie? A: The whole film is a series of escalations based on revenge  Q: Does the movie portray revenge as a justified action? A: Derek's arrest interrupts this pattern, he goes off to prison and with the help of Dr. Sweeney he realises  Q: What does he realize? A: the pattern of behaviour and does what he can to prevent it from going any further  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Is he successful at preventing it given the younger brother's death?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: The message of American History X is quite simple: violence begets violence. The whole film is a series of escalations based on revenge; Derek and Danny lose their father and hate consumes them. They win a basketball game against the black gang (and their turf in the process) and the gang try and steal their fathers' truck as revenge, Derek kills them over it. But then Derek's arrest interrupts this pattern, he goes off to prison and with the help of Dr. Sweeney he realises the pattern of behaviour and does what he can to prevent it from going any further. Derek has his catharsis and becomes a different person, and tries to help Danny do the same. But the problem is the same hasn't happened to those that he's wronged; there are still people out there from the black gang who have lost friends and blame them both for it, and in the end Danny pays the price. It is much more poignant and reflective of real life in this way, after years of fighting it's not so simple to drop everything and get the happy ending Hollywood has taught us is waiting.  <sep>  Q: Why did American History X end so unexpectedly? A: The message of American History X is quite simple: violence begets violence  Q: But why did the movie end in such an unexpected way? A: there are still people out there from the black gang who have lost friends and blame them both for it  Q: What was the central theme of the movie? A: The whole film is a series of escalations based on revenge  Q: Does the movie portray revenge as a justified action? A: Derek's arrest interrupts this pattern, he goes off to prison and with the help of Dr. Sweeney he realises  Q: What does he realize? A: the pattern of behaviour and does what he can to prevent it from going any further  Q: Is he successful at preventing it given the younger brother's death? A: Derek has his catharsis and becomes a different person, and tries to help Danny do the same  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Why doesn't Edward Norton do something about the Neo-Nazi group he established?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: The message of American History X is quite simple: violence begets violence. The whole film is a series of escalations based on revenge; Derek and Danny lose their father and hate consumes them. They win a basketball game against the black gang (and their turf in the process) and the gang try and steal their fathers' truck as revenge, Derek kills them over it. But then Derek's arrest interrupts this pattern, he goes off to prison and with the help of Dr. Sweeney he realises the pattern of behaviour and does what he can to prevent it from going any further. Derek has his catharsis and becomes a different person, and tries to help Danny do the same. But the problem is the same hasn't happened to those that he's wronged; there are still people out there from the black gang who have lost friends and blame them both for it, and in the end Danny pays the price. It is much more poignant and reflective of real life in this way, after years of fighting it's not so simple to drop everything and get the happy ending Hollywood has taught us is waiting.  <sep>  Q: Why did American History X end so unexpectedly? A: The message of American History X is quite simple: violence begets violence  Q: But why did the movie end in such an unexpected way? A: there are still people out there from the black gang who have lost friends and blame them both for it  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: How did this ending tie in with the rest of the movie's story and themes?
Output: No
CONTEXT: I accept and agree with the answer that was given on SFF (“Sansa was smart enough to wait for everyone to say aye, so they can't go back on their word”). However in my opinion there could also be the fact that, the north has always had its own sort of “culture” and independence, there is a certain respect between northern houses. So it's easier for the other kingdoms to accept them as independent, since they've always, culturally, been seen as seperate from the other six kingdoms. On top of this, the north is the size of the other six kingdoms combined, so having them ruled independently makes much more sense, than in the other kingdoms cases.  <sep>  Q: Why didn't the other kingdoms want to be independent?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I accept and agree with the answer that was given on SFF (“Sansa was smart enough to wait for everyone to say aye, so they can't go back on their word”). However in my opinion there could also be the fact that, the north has always had its own sort of “culture” and independence, there is a certain respect between northern houses. So it's easier for the other kingdoms to accept them as independent, since they've always, culturally, been seen as seperate from the other six kingdoms. On top of this, the north is the size of the other six kingdoms combined, so having them ruled independently makes much more sense, than in the other kingdoms cases.  <sep>  Q: Why didn't the other kingdoms want to be independent? A: he north is the size of the other six kingdoms combined, so having them ruled independently makes much more sense, than in the other kingdoms cases  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Will the other kingdoms try to have the North rule them?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I accept and agree with the answer that was given on SFF (“Sansa was smart enough to wait for everyone to say aye, so they can't go back on their word”). However in my opinion there could also be the fact that, the north has always had its own sort of “culture” and independence, there is a certain respect between northern houses. So it's easier for the other kingdoms to accept them as independent, since they've always, culturally, been seen as seperate from the other six kingdoms. On top of this, the north is the size of the other six kingdoms combined, so having them ruled independently makes much more sense, than in the other kingdoms cases.  <sep>  Q: Why didn't the other kingdoms want to be independent? A: he north is the size of the other six kingdoms combined, so having them ruled independently makes much more sense, than in the other kingdoms cases  Q: Will the other kingdoms try to have the North rule them? A: the north has always had its own sort of “culture” and independence, there is a certain respect between northern houses  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Is Sansa the ruler of the North?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I accept and agree with the answer that was given on SFF (“Sansa was smart enough to wait for everyone to say aye, so they can't go back on their word”). However in my opinion there could also be the fact that, the north has always had its own sort of “culture” and independence, there is a certain respect between northern houses. So it's easier for the other kingdoms to accept them as independent, since they've always, culturally, been seen as seperate from the other six kingdoms. On top of this, the north is the size of the other six kingdoms combined, so having them ruled independently makes much more sense, than in the other kingdoms cases.  <sep>  Q: Why didn't the other kingdoms want to be independent? A: he north is the size of the other six kingdoms combined, so having them ruled independently makes much more sense, than in the other kingdoms cases  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: why didn't the Iron Islands want to be independent?
Output: No
CONTEXT: It's not uncommon for a 6 year old to be attending kindergarten, especially near the end of the school year. Most children turn 6 during the course of school year. In most states a child must be the age of 5 by August 31st or September 1st to enroll in kindergarten. A typical school year ends in late May or early June, if a child entered kindergarten at the age of 5 and was born before May they would leave kindergarten at the age of 6.  <sep>  Q: Why are there kids above 6 and in school?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: It's not uncommon for a 6 year old to be attending kindergarten, especially near the end of the school year. Most children turn 6 during the course of school year. In most states a child must be the age of 5 by August 31st or September 1st to enroll in kindergarten. A typical school year ends in late May or early June, if a child entered kindergarten at the age of 5 and was born before May they would leave kindergarten at the age of 6.  <sep>  Q: Why are there kids above 6 and in school? A: It's not uncommon for a 6 year old to be attending kindergarten, especially near the end of the school year. Most children turn 6 during the course of school year  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: When do kids typically start kindergarten in the United States?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: It's not uncommon for a 6 year old to be attending kindergarten, especially near the end of the school year. Most children turn 6 during the course of school year. In most states a child must be the age of 5 by August 31st or September 1st to enroll in kindergarten. A typical school year ends in late May or early June, if a child entered kindergarten at the age of 5 and was born before May they would leave kindergarten at the age of 6.  <sep>  Q: Why are there kids above 6 and in school? A: It's not uncommon for a 6 year old to be attending kindergarten, especially near the end of the school year. Most children turn 6 during the course of school year  Q: When do kids typically start kindergarten in the United States? A: In most states a child must be the age of 5 by August 31st or September 1st to enroll in kindergarten  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Is there anything else I should know about kids starting kindergarten?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: It's not uncommon for a 6 year old to be attending kindergarten, especially near the end of the school year. Most children turn 6 during the course of school year. In most states a child must be the age of 5 by August 31st or September 1st to enroll in kindergarten. A typical school year ends in late May or early June, if a child entered kindergarten at the age of 5 and was born before May they would leave kindergarten at the age of 6.  <sep>  Q: Why are there kids above 6 and in school? A: It's not uncommon for a 6 year old to be attending kindergarten, especially near the end of the school year. Most children turn 6 during the course of school year  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Does the bad guy find his kid?
Output: No
CONTEXT: While we will never know as neither boat used their detonator, I would suggest that they had each others, going purely on what was shown and what the film makers were trying to say. The Joker's previous 'gag' - which also failed - was to try and get Gothamites to kill each other for own protection or self interest as he believed it would demonstrate a general moral bankruptcy. 'You failed to kill the lawyer...' - I cannot remember how the rest of the line goes but the boat finale appears to come from a desire to repeat the exercise and Batman puts the emphasis on all of this in his final rebuke. The film also goes a long way to show that both sets of passengers specifically reject the opportunity to kill each other - even for self defence. If a comic source for this plot line does actually show this as a double - bluff then it is still irrelevant to what was actually said and shown in 'The Dark Knight'.  <sep>  Q: What did the Joker's detonators actually target?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: While we will never know as neither boat used their detonator, I would suggest that they had each others, going purely on what was shown and what the film makers were trying to say. The Joker's previous 'gag' - which also failed - was to try and get Gothamites to kill each other for own protection or self interest as he believed it would demonstrate a general moral bankruptcy. 'You failed to kill the lawyer...' - I cannot remember how the rest of the line goes but the boat finale appears to come from a desire to repeat the exercise and Batman puts the emphasis on all of this in his final rebuke. The film also goes a long way to show that both sets of passengers specifically reject the opportunity to kill each other - even for self defence. If a comic source for this plot line does actually show this as a double - bluff then it is still irrelevant to what was actually said and shown in 'The Dark Knight'.  <sep>  Q: What did the Joker's detonators actually target? A: we will never know as neither boat used their detonator  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Were the detonators for their own boat of the other boat?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: He was talking about the entire source code project (getting in someone else's body) and trying to explain to her what was really going on to make her understand/help him. As he realizes his actions might seem strange, he tries to convince her to go with it. She dismisses it as it doesn't seem important (only dreams) and flirts with him  <sep>  Q: What does the conversation mean?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: He was talking about the entire source code project (getting in someone else's body) and trying to explain to her what was really going on to make her understand/help him. As he realizes his actions might seem strange, he tries to convince her to go with it. She dismisses it as it doesn't seem important (only dreams) and flirts with him  <sep>  Q: What does the conversation mean? A: He was talking about the entire source code project (getting in someone else's body) and trying to explain to her what was really going on to make her understand/help him  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Was she weirded out that she was in his dreams?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: He was talking about the entire source code project (getting in someone else's body) and trying to explain to her what was really going on to make her understand/help him. As he realizes his actions might seem strange, he tries to convince her to go with it. She dismisses it as it doesn't seem important (only dreams) and flirts with him  <sep>  Q: What does the conversation mean? A: He was talking about the entire source code project (getting in someone else's body) and trying to explain to her what was really going on to make her understand/help him  Q: Was she weirded out that she was in his dreams? A: She dismisses it as it doesn't seem important (only dreams) and flirts with him  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What are his intentions with the conversation?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I bet it had something to do with her consciousness never really disappearing. My interpretation is that, in the movie, bodies are mortal. They die. But a person's consciousness, their awareness and ability to interact with the physical universe, is timeless and is not tied to the mortal body they inhabit for a while. (That's just my guess. The movie was pretty trippy and didn't explain everything fully.)  <sep>  Q: What did Lucy mean by "We never really die"?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I bet it had something to do with her consciousness never really disappearing. My interpretation is that, in the movie, bodies are mortal. They die. But a person's consciousness, their awareness and ability to interact with the physical universe, is timeless and is not tied to the mortal body they inhabit for a while. (That's just my guess. The movie was pretty trippy and didn't explain everything fully.)  <sep>  Q: What did Lucy mean by "We never really die"? A: I bet it had something to do with her consciousness never really disappearing  Q: Did Lucy become immortal? A: a person's consciousness, their awareness and ability to interact with the physical universe, is timeless and is not tied to the mortal body they inhabit for a while  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: So is that what happened when Lucy's brain usability got to 100% or something?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I bet it had something to do with her consciousness never really disappearing. My interpretation is that, in the movie, bodies are mortal. They die. But a person's consciousness, their awareness and ability to interact with the physical universe, is timeless and is not tied to the mortal body they inhabit for a while. (That's just my guess. The movie was pretty trippy and didn't explain everything fully.)  <sep>  Q: What did Lucy mean by "We never really die"? A: I bet it had something to do with her consciousness never really disappearing  Q: Did Lucy become immortal? A: a person's consciousness, their awareness and ability to interact with the physical universe, is timeless and is not tied to the mortal body they inhabit for a while  Q: So is that what happened when Lucy's brain usability got to 100% or something? A: That's just my guess. The movie was pretty trippy and didn't explain everything fully  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: So Lucy is immortal because of her brain or something?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I bet it had something to do with her consciousness never really disappearing. My interpretation is that, in the movie, bodies are mortal. They die. But a person's consciousness, their awareness and ability to interact with the physical universe, is timeless and is not tied to the mortal body they inhabit for a while. (That's just my guess. The movie was pretty trippy and didn't explain everything fully.)  <sep>  Q: What did Lucy mean by "We never really die"? A: I bet it had something to do with her consciousness never really disappearing  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: At the end of the movie Lucy told the officer "I am everywhere." What did she mean by that?
Output: No
CONTEXT: I bet it had something to do with her consciousness never really disappearing. My interpretation is that, in the movie, bodies are mortal. They die. But a person's consciousness, their awareness and ability to interact with the physical universe, is timeless and is not tied to the mortal body they inhabit for a while. (That's just my guess. The movie was pretty trippy and didn't explain everything fully.)  <sep>  Q: What did Lucy mean by "We never really die"? A: I bet it had something to do with her consciousness never really disappearing  Q: Did Lucy become immortal? A: a person's consciousness, their awareness and ability to interact with the physical universe, is timeless and is not tied to the mortal body they inhabit for a while  Q: So is that what happened when Lucy's brain usability got to 100% or something? A: That's just my guess. The movie was pretty trippy and didn't explain everything fully  Q: So Lucy is immortal because of her brain or something? A: My interpretation is that, in the movie, bodies are mortal  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Who was the officer in the car with Lucy?
Output: No